EPTHow good can you get with low APM? - Page 7
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
BrenttheGreat
United States150 Posts
| ||
|
kodancer
United States89 Posts
APM isn't like your IQ per say. It'll gradually increase with time so don't get your hopes down. | ||
|
Precipice
United States121 Posts
| ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
| ||
|
Iron_
United States389 Posts
In the largest tournament I ever played in (50K first place) I tried to match the Korean players (CNS_Grunt) APM and made some very simple errors which helped lose the game. Dont every try to increase APM just because. Only work on it if your brain is telling you to do more but you just cant get to it. In order to effectively use all 100 APM or more you need to be thinking ahead and really know the game first I believe. | ||
|
kavaron
Greece22 Posts
During heavy battles I touch 80apm. IMO SC2 is more about the build order and dirty tactics than battle management. | ||
|
Rkie
United States1278 Posts
| ||
|
shawster
Canada2485 Posts
On July 05 2010 05:24 wsfosho wrote: Height and APM are about the same thing. In the NBA, after you reach a certain height, you can only get so much better. After about 6'2 for example, it doesn't really matter how tall you are when you are competing. The best player in the game was 6'6 - Michael Jordan. If you're 7'6 like Shawn Bradley, it doesn't guarantee you will be the best. You can also compare IQ and APM. After a certain IQ - 120, you are deemed a genius. If you have a 195 IQ, it doesn't mean that you will be highly successful. Christopher Langan had a 195 IQ and he is a bouncer. What it takes to be successful at this game is creativity. These are the kind of people who wins Nobel Prizes - not everyone above 120 will have one. you're wrong creativity only goes so far, mechanics prevail after the strats have been discovered. nobel prize winners aren't the best players, or in this case just because i invented 14 pool doesn't mean i am the best. once this game is live and people start playing it apm will matter a lot more, once you get to a higher level i think this game will become more of a macro game again. right now it seems like 80% of my matches are 2base 3base rather then intense macro games. that's just because this game is new and timings haven't been mapped out. play more, macro more, train more and your apm will increase. mechanics matter, and i don't think we'll be able to macro 5 bases with 70 apm. | ||
|
TheDna
Germany577 Posts
On July 05 2010 00:59 Melt wrote: in SC2 you need about half the APM than in SCBW, so around 150 should be ok to do pretty much everything you need/want to do (especially as protoss who don't require quite as much APM as Terran or Zerg). Thats simply not true. Years will tell how much APM you need. APM is also counted differently so its completely impossible to compare. There are already players with >200 sc2 apm wich should be >300-400 bw APM so i think koreans will end up with about the same APM numbers as the game developes. | ||
Myles
United States5162 Posts
On July 05 2010 08:02 TheDna wrote: Thats simply not true. Years will tell how much APM you need. APM is also counted differently so its completely impossible to compare. There are already players with >200 sc2 apm wich should be >300-400 bw APM so i think koreans will end up with about the same APM numbers as the game developes. While I agree that he pulled the figure out of his ass, I don't think you can argue that BW doesn't require more APM than SC2 just because of automine and MBS. Maybe high level players will figure out ways to put more APM to good use, but right now after a certain point you're just clicking extra and not really getting anything out of it. | ||
|
Broodfather
United States11 Posts
As posted above, the timing of your accuracy/precision with macro/micro is most important, it's my personal opinion that 15%-25% of all players' APM is due to extra (and un-needed) actions {Please don't destroy me if you disagree}. Please watch your replays, I was like you once but it actually works  | ||
|
torm
Canada274 Posts
Dramatized example: I want to move my drone from my main to my natural, I can: a) guide my drone to my natural by clicking nine thousand and one times on my natural, or b) click once on my natural "actions" for (a): 9002 "actions" for (b): 2 Result? Exactly the same. It is for this reason that the common phrase "BW REQUIRES MOAR APM DEN SC2 SO LIEK U NED 2 HAV ' X ' AMOUNT OF APM 2 B COMPETITIV IN BW" is stupid. BW does not require more APM, there are simply more things that need to be done, and more often in BW. i.e. you cannot "s" larva, and hold "d" to turn all your larvae into drones in two button presses in BW, but you have to manually go to each hatchery and do it. This is an example of having to do the same thing more often. And the lack of automine in BW means that you have to manually move your workers onto mineral patches, an example of more things that need to be done. Thus, you are most likely going to have a "higher" APM in BW, but there is no magic APM range that you NEED to be in to be a competitive player. I wouldn't be surprised if 90% of the contributors in this thread were sporting the new razer flashybutton APM tracking mouse. Focus on doing what you need to do and stop wasting your time worrying about useless statistics such as APM if you have any hope of being good at this game. | ||
|
Myles
United States5162 Posts
On July 05 2010 10:21 torm wrote: It is for this reason that the common phrase "BW REQUIRES MOAR APM DEN SC2 SO LIEK U NED 2 HAV ' X ' AMOUNT OF APM 2 B COMPETITIV IN BW" is stupid. BW does not require more APM, there are simply more things that need to be done, and more often in BW. i.e. you cannot "s" larva, and hold "d" to turn all your larvae into drones in two button presses in BW, but you have to manually go to each hatchery and do it. This is an example of having to do the same thing more often. And the lack of automine in BW means that you have to manually move your workers onto mineral patches, an example of more things that need to be done. Thus, you are most likely going to have a "higher" APM in BW, but there is no magic APM range that you NEED to be in to be a competitive player. Seriously? You explained in your own post why BW requires more APM than SC2. To get the same thing done you need more clicks, thus more APM. Of course the game doesn't absolutely require anything, but to be good it does. There is a minimum amount of APM you need to get everything done. I play(pretty poorly) at around 60 APM and I'm pretty efficient about it(I don't click things extra or spam my hotkeys for no reason) and I feel like I can't manage everything going on once I get past 2 bases. | ||
|
ooni
Australia1498 Posts
| ||
|
Accer
Korea (South)319 Posts
| ||
|
eNyoron
United States170 Posts
However, it's also very much possible to have inferior teamwork, tactics, positioning and still beat (even decimate) an opponent simply due to better mechanics. And at a competitive level, good apm/speed is a requisite for good play. | ||
|
tfmdjeff
United States170 Posts
I'd say aim for 120-170 apm. Any higher is unnecessary, any lower and you potentially won't be working as fast as your opponent and it can put you behind. | ||
|
TheDna
Germany577 Posts
On July 05 2010 09:43 Myles wrote: While I agree that he pulled the figure out of his ass, I don't think you can argue that BW doesn't require more APM than SC2 just because of automine and MBS. Maybe high level players will figure out ways to put more APM to good use, but right now after a certain point you're just clicking extra and not really getting anything out of it. Right now the game isnt even released I m curious if you even find sc classic beta replays with players having >50 APM  Because thats where we are right now with sc2! | ||
|
Myles
United States5162 Posts
On July 05 2010 12:25 TheDna wrote: Right now the game isnt even released I m curious if you even find sc classic beta replays with players having >50 APM Because thats where we are right now with sc2! No, were not. I buy the SC2 in a new game so we don't know all the possible strategies, but the mechanics are pretty much the same, just easier. Unless a bunch of micro-intensive tricks are found, SC2 won't require as high of APM to keep up with everything. I'd like to think it's possible, but I don't think the odds are good. | ||
|
virgozero
Canada412 Posts
I am by no means a pro gamer only a top5 platty but I can reason the value of apm easily and I am sure everyone can. How much apm do we need to send probes to mind and make a robe? 10? How much apm do we need to move 7 stalkers from hotkey 1 to point A and move 3 zealots to point B from htokey 2 and create 2 guardian shields and 3 accurate force fields and then individually blinking stalkers to the back and at the same time chrono boosting your warp gates and making a probe on your natural and building another forge and gateway all at the same instance? 500? My point is apm on itself is an arbitrary useless number. What you should be looking at is the Apm/Anpm actions per minute over actions needed per minute to create 100% efficient macro+micro whitera may have 120apm and kick ass but that is 120 AVERAGE apl that does not mean Jack shit. Look at whitera when he's battling with 3 bases, his apm goes well above 200 and even ten you can see whiteras macro is not anything near efficient, but hel, the only person that seems to do better Is idra who has 250+ apm from pure macro (who also happened to practice 12 hours a day) husky caster a game between tlo and sen where they were both scouting and fiddling with their probes, their apm was over 300. Yet tlos avrg apm is only about 150max, goes to show you how bullshit average apm is. | ||
| ||
